Debunking ‘zombie theories’: Learning myths persist despite science proving otherwise

There are few issues in the education world that are as divisive as the theories of how students learn best. Innovator and learning designer Richard Culatta argues that despite being debunked, many popular learning theories remain pervasive in classrooms.

These approaches influence teaching approaches and educational practices despite the lack of evidence supporting them. According to researcher Bryan Goodwin, these ideas are a bit like zombies and continue to “haunt” our schools.

One of the problems is that these myths about how students learn make it harder for students to succeed and ignore what cognitive science reveals about the true nature of learning. So, in this article, I look at five of the nine myths Culatta debunks and the credible research he uses.

Building on Culatta’s ideas, Daniel Leonard reminds us that well-intentioned “education” content runs afoul of the truth: he quotes a study showing that only 27% of the most popular TikTok videos about autism were accurate, whereas 73% were either “overgeneralised” or outright “inaccurate”.

Learning styles

One of the most popular yet debunked theories is the notion of “learning styles”. This theory suggests that students learn best when the material is presented in a way that matches their learning style, such as visual, auditory or kinesthetic. Many teachers continue to classify students according to these supposed styles, often restructuring lessons to suit the perceived learning preferences.

Research, however, has thoroughly discredited the idea that learning styles have an impact on comprehension or retention. Although it’s true that people have preferences for certain types of activities, the brain itself does not learn better using one method rather than another.

“The assumption that students have ­distinct learning styles and learn best through these channels has influenced teacher practice for decades – despite a lack of evidence that such styles even exist,” writes William Furey in The Stubborn Myth of “Learning Styles”.

Howard Gardner, whose theory of multiple intelligences often fuels the belief in learning styles, has clarified that his ideas were never intended to label students through a single approach. Current research supports using a range of teaching methods for all students rather than assigning them a specific learning style.

Left brain vs right brain

The theory of “left brain versus right brain” dominance suggests that people are either more analytical (left-brained) or more ­creative (right-brained). It’s also linked to another myth that we use only 10% of our brains, a notion that is simply untrue. Both sides of the brain work together.

Human brains are highly interconnected. Creativity and analytical skills are not determined by one side of the brain being more active than the other; instead, they emerge from complex interactions in the entire brain.

In Right Brain/Left Brain, Right?, Dr ­Robert H Shmerling writes: “According to a 2013 study from the University of Utah, brain scans demonstrate that activity is similar on both sides of the brain regardless of one’s personality.

“They looked at the brain scans of more than 1,000 young people between the ages of seven and 29 and divided different areas of the brain into 7,000 regions to determine whether one side of the brain was more active or connected than the other side.

“No evidence of ‘sidedness’ was found. The authors concluded that the notion of some people being more left-brained or right-brained is more a figure of speech than an anatomically accurate description.”

Artists and scientists use their whole brains in similar ways, debunking the ­theory that one side is more dominant or developed than the other.

The 10,000-hour rule

Popularised by Malcolm Gladwell, the 10,000-hour rule claims that anyone can become an expert in a field after 10,000 hours of practice. However, research has clarified that it’s the quality, not just quantity, of practice that matters. In his book Outliers, Gladwell generalised findings from a research paper that discussed “deliberate practice”, which refers to focused, structured practice improving specific skills.

However, in their paper titled The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance, K Anders Ericsson, Ralf T Krampe and Clemens Tesch-Römer dispute this. “Our empirical studies have already shown that experts carefully schedule deliberate practice and limit its duration to avoid exhaustion and burnout.

“By viewing expert performers not simply as domain-­specific experts, but as experts in maintaining high levels of practice and improving performance, we are likely to uncover valuable information about the optimal conditions for learning and education.”

We can multitask

The belief that we can effectively multitask has been debunked for some time. Neuroscientists explain that rather than processing multiple tasks at once, the brain rapidly switches focus between activities. Each switch requires cognitive effort and time, which reduces productivity and the quality of focus on any single task.

An article by the American Psychological Association titled Multitasking: Switching Costs explains that three researchers in the 1990s “found that even when people had to switch completely predictably between two tasks every two or four trials, they were still slower on task-switch than on task-repeat trials. Moreover, increasing the time available between trials for preparation reduced but did not eliminate the cost of switching.”

Gender-based learning preferences

Another myth that persists is that boys and girls excel at different subjects due to brain-based gender differences. However, research consistently shows that environmental and social influences shape learning far more than biological factors.

As neuropsychologist Lutz Jäncke writes that “most of these sex/gender differences are not large enough to support the assumption of sexual dimorphism in terms of brain anatomy, brain function, cognition and behaviour”. Instead, he suggests that “many brain and cognitive features are modulated by environment, culture and practice (and several other influences)”.

The perception that boys are naturally inclined towards maths and science, for example, or that girls are inherently better at languages and arts, often creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Such stereotypes can unintentionally influence students’ self-concepts and limit their engagement in particular subjects.

Way forward

Culatta concludes that there is a gap between these “zombie learning theories” and scientific research and classroom practice. He highlights the need for teachers to stay updated on evidence-­based strategies.

He argues that as these myths persist, they may inadvertently hinder the learning process. By shifting focus to methods grounded in cognitive science, schools can provide students with the best chance for meaningful, lasting education. DM

Dr Mark Potterton is the director of the Three2Six Refugee Children’s Education Project.

This story first appeared in our weekly DM168 newspaper, available countrywide for R35.